THE Swiss Islamic activist Tariq Ramadan has been invited by Griffith University to be the keynote speaker at its conference opening in Brisbane today.

The fact that Australia is allowing Ramadan to enter the country at all will raise eyebrows in security circles elsewhere. Ramadan is the grandson of Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood: the spiritual backers of al-Qa'ida and Hamas and whose goal is to Islamise the world.

While it is, of course, unfair to tar someone with his grandfather's views, there is ample reason to think that in the case of Tariq Ramadan the apple has not fallen far from the tree.

Ramadan has been banned from entering the US because of his alleged association with extremists. The Geneva Islamic Centre, with which he is closely associated, has been linked to terrorists of the Algerian FIS (Islamic Salvation Front) and the GIA (Armed Islamic Group). A Spanish police report claimed that Ahmed Brahim, an al-Qa'ida leader jailed in Spain, was "in frequent contact" with Ramadan, a claim he has denied.

Yet the Swiss activist has not only been allowed into Britain but is ensconced at St Anthony's College, Oxford as a research fellow and is much lionised by the British establishment, appearing at security seminars on Islamism and even serving as an adviser to the British Government on tackling Islamic extremism.

So how to explain this wild divergence of views about Tariq Ramadan? And does Australia have cause to be concerned?

Ramadan's message is highly seductive to a Western world terrified by Islamic radicalism. For Ramadan preaches the comforting message of an unthreatening Islam that can accommodate itself to modernity and to the West. He does so in a charismatic style combining high intellect, a winsome French accent and impossibly hip glamour. To the desperate British establishment, the picture he paints so beguilingly of a way out of the Islamist nightmare has made him into the rock star of the counter-terrorism circuit.

But closer scrutiny of what he actually says - and perhaps even more importantly, does not say - suggests the talented Mr Ramadan is an Islamist wolf in moderniser's clothing. To the Islamic world he says one thing; to credulous Western audiences quite another in language that is slippery, opaque, manipulative and disingenuous.

His reputation as a Muslim reformer owes everything to the wishful thinking of those who want so much to believe in him that they fail to grasp what he is really saying ...

Far from offering a way to modernise Islam, he proposes instead to Islamise modernity. And he is all the more dangerous precisely because his weapon is not a bomb-belt but his tongue. Some may say that, even if his thinking is reactionary, that is no reason to refuse to let him into the country. This naive view ignores the fact that the Islamists' war of civilisation is being conducted principally on the battleground of ideas.

As Fourest has written, the strategy of Ramadan is to globalise the Islamic awakening that is part of that strategy. In May 2003, the Appeal Court of Lyon agreed that language employed by preachers such as Ramadan "can influence young Muslims and can serve as a factor inciting them to join up with those engaged in violent acts". Wherever he goes, Ramadan is a pied piper leading the young to jihad by his mesmeric tunes. Through his appeal, he is probably the most dangerous Islamist in the Western world.

Thanks to the short-sightedness of the British Government, brother Tariq has been given a platform to radicalise innumerable young Muslims. Does Australia really want to follow suit?

Ramadan has a few select rhetorical tricks, but behind those tricks is this reality:

He wants to see the islamization of Europe. He thinks that Europeans suffer from a "spiritual emptiness" and that they are ripe for wonderful Islam. He has said that "the West is in decline, and the Arab-Islamic world is on the road to renewal" -- yet that "renewal," he believes, will take place when Islam conqueres, through his kind of Da'wa. His Da'wa, of course, is far more cunning, with far more roses than guns ...

But the goal of Ramadan is the goal of Bin Laden and indeed of all Believers: the victory of dar al-Islam over dar al-Harb, the removal of all obstacles in the dar al-Harb to the spread of Islam, and the subjugation of all non-Muslims -- who will be subjugated, as they have always been subjugated over 1350 years of Muslim conquest (with not a single exception anywhere) and, as dhimmis (where not killed or converted outright), subject to a permanent status of humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity ...

Ramadan is kaput as a propagandist among the Infidels. No one takes him seriously. His job in Geneva had come to an end. He was desperate to find innocent Infidels elsewhere -- and to start over where they would not, he felt, know him as well as the French and Swiss had come to know him ...

Tariq, appears in the "Islam" issue of The New York Times Book Review, where he identifies himself as at present a "professor at Oxford." He is no such thing. He has been a temporary lecturer at St. Antony's College, in the Middle Eastern wing (the other wing is Russian and East European Studies), which ever since its inception was the fiefdom of the late Albert Hourani, described by J. B. Kelly as "a plump abbot dispensing his favors," who allowed the place to be a diploma mill for all kinds of doubtful people. The D. Phil. does not require courses, but only a thesis, and every Rashid, Hamid, and Yusuf could get a D. Phil. at St. Antony's, as long as Hourani was ruling the roost. Now he's gone, and possibly things are changing there. But not completely, for Tariq Ramadan was given his temporary post.

Now the Arabs have got together, and the most "respectable" of them -- the government of Oman -- has simply given a large sum of money, not only for a chair, but with a specific non-negotiable candidate, the Arab Muslim candidate, to fill it, at the otherwise respectable University of Leiden. That's right, the same University of Leiden that has a distinguished history in Islamic studies, where Joseph Schacht, having left Germany in disgust in 1933 (Schacht was not Jewish), ended up for a while, and where C. Snouck Hurgronje has a center named after him, is giving Tariq Ramadan a grand title -- "professor," I presume, or possibly "director" of some "institute" created just for him by fellow Arab Muslims. And that will be convenient. That will allow him to lecture, and to write articles, billed as "Tariq Ramadan, professor at the University of Leiden."

But don't believe a word of it. His chair is entirely bought and paid for. It's to make his propaganda, his presentation, more impressive, more effective, more convincing.

Tariq Ramadan is a worthy grandson of that grandsire who founded the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928, Hassan al-Banna, the demagogue who used to whip up Cairene crowds so that, in fits of post-speech enthusiasm, they would then go out and attack Copts and Jews. He refuses to distance himself from his great relative: "he was my grandfather," he says, his voice full of filial piety. Would that answer satisfy you if instead of Tariq Ramadan, the person being interviewed was, say, the grandson of Martin Bormann?

Why he should be taken seriously, or treated with respect, at this point, this sly creature who wears on his sleeve his slyness, is beyond me.

Now, if I hadn't set all this out, you might have been fooled. You might have thought "ummmh, so Tariq Ramadan is a full professor at the University of Leiden. And the University of Leiden has been such a center of Islamic studies. Well, well, well."

Now you won't. But others, who will not have read about Tariq Ramadan and How He Got His Chair At Leiden, may still be. No one is forcing American Infidels to play the gull, the fool, the sap made fun of throughout history, now buying a bottle of political patent-medicine, now sending money to a Nigerian who apparently needs it in order to obtain the proceeds from his late father's bank account, which proceeds will of course be shared with the kind American who sends a nominal sum -- oh, $25,000 will do nicely for now. But the idiocy of those who refuse to study Tariq Ramadan, who refuse to understand his roots, his friends, his supporters, his aims, his insidiousness -- well, unlike the man who sends his life savings to a post office box in Nigeria, the folly in this case affects the rest of us, damages us, makes us all less secure.

And those doing this damage include people who give valuable space, at book reviews, for articles on Islam, to people just exactly like...Tariq Ramadan.

TARIQ Ramadan has been called a Muslim Martin Luther and one of the most dangerous Islamists in the West.

His support for the emergence of a new European form of Islam has raised the hopes of some in the West who yearn for a more engaged Islamic community that adapts to the challenges of modernity.

His critics, however, are deeply suspicious, accusing him of a dual discourse, speaking a conciliatory message to the West while delivering the hard-line, anti-Semitic fundamentalist message of Salafism to Muslims ...

Ramadan created a public furore in France in 2003 during a television debate with then French interior minister and now President Nicolas Sarkozy. Sarkozy brought up the point of view expressed by Ramadan's older brother, Hani, who supports women who commit adultery being stoned to death. The most Ramadan could do was call for a moratorium. As Berman observed, "Some six million French people watched that exchange. A huge number of Muslim immigrants must have been among them: the very people who might have benefited from hearing someone speak with absolute clarity about violence against women. Ramadan couldn't do it."

YOU are to be commended for your comprehensive coverage of radical Muslim activity, most recently the articles about the visit of Tariq Ramadan, the world’s leading Islamist proselytiser (Opinion, 3/2).

However, why is there no mention of the fact that the conference at which Professor Ramadan is the keynote speaker is at Griffith University, which received a gift of $1 million from the Saudi Arabian Government last year, much to the dismay of many people in Australia, including the local Muslim community.

The main worry then was that this funding would allow the Saudis to extend the influence of fundamentalist and sectarian versions of Islam (as espoused by al-Qa’ida) at the expense of the more moderate versions that exist in Australia, and now this is happening _ with the assistance of $50,000 provided by the Queensland Government.

While it is vital to reveal the truth about ideologues such as Professor Ramadan, it is even more important to expose the affects of influence-buying on important public institutions ssuch as our universities.

TARIQ Ramadan - the Muslim academic banned from entering the US - was consulted by the Howard government last year on how to prevent the radicalisation of Muslims in Australia.

The professor of Islamic studies at Oxford University advised eight Department of Immigration officials via a video conference last June ...

"Professor Ramadan has already made an important contribution to Australian government thinking on Islam and the West, through a video-link discussion between London and Canberra last year," he said.

A Department of Immigration and Citizenship spokesman confirmed the department had sought the advice.

"Professor Ramadan was approached by DIAC because of his work in the area of Islamic integration into Western societies," he said. "This was of direct relevance to the work DIAC was doing under the National Action Plan to Build on Social Cohesion, Harmony and Security."

The National Action Plan was established after the 2005 London bombings to help integrate Muslims into Australian society...

Professor Ramadan said it was possible for Muslim immigrants to belong to the international Islamic community without undermining their loyalty to their adopted country.

Fourest has rendered an invaluable service. She demonstrates with great skill that Ramadan is a dangerous radical who, far from modernizing Islam, is in fact attempting to Islamize modernity. Of undoubted ability and charisma, but with no respect for or allegiance to Western values of liberty, Ramadan is poisoning the minds of young Muslims in the West. He spreads his message through personal appearances and with the sale of tens of thousands of cassettes through Tawhid, an Islamist publishing house with close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Under Ramadan’s influence, Islamist youths develop a hatred for Western values and dream of creating a totalitarian Islamic theocracy, not only in the heart of Europe, but eventually the entire globe, until, in the words of al-Banna, “the Islamic banner . . . waves supreme over the human race.”

A Muslim intellectual has achieved star status in French-speaking Europe. He draws crowds of young immigrants and speaks to them with charismatic fervor. He enchants the anti-globalization left and the readers of “Le Monde Diplomatique.” He cites with equal mastery the Koran and Nietzsche, Heidegger and the sayings of the Prophet. He is admired by Fr. Michel Lelong, the leading Islam’s scholar of the Church in France. He sells thousands of cassette recordings of his sermons. His name is Tariq Ramadan. . . .

In recent months he has been accused of anti-Semitism. He has had harsh confrontations with influential Jewish intellectuals such as Bernard-Henri Levy, André Glucksmann, and Bernard Kouchner. “Le Monde” and other important newspapers have published critical reviews about him. But for Ramadan, this is all proof of the rightness of his position and of the West’s innate hostility toward Islam ...

But his ideological allegiances are more important than his ancestry. Tariq Ramadan – working within the very heart of the West – weaves together Islamic politics and the radical criticisms of Western rationalism made by Nietzsche, Heidegger, Cioran, Guénon, and neo-Marxist and anti-global currents. . . .

Tariq Ramadan also sees the West in decline. And into the spiritual void left by Judaism and Christianity, Islam can enter and overcome, no longer enduring modernity, but islamicizing it. The Western public likes Ramadan because his vision includes elements of democracy, equal citizenship, and free expression. He debates both secularized Muslims and those who separate themselves in closed communities. He announces the birth of a fully European Islam. And he ventures on this long journey armed with the doctrine of the taqiyya, or the art of dissimulation, a typical Islamic practice on enemy soil ...

There have certainly always been in France, and there still are, fundamentalist currents of complete hatred and refusal toward Western culture. But these instances from other times have never been able to demolish or even exploit the juridical and mental structures of our society.

The new ideology is now well defined. Its spokesman, at least in France and all of Western Europe, is Tariq Ramadan. Ramadan does not hide himself or devise conspiracies. While affirming his Muslim faith, he presents himself as a great Western intellectual. Young and handsome, he speaks with mastery and clarity the language of the intelligentsia of Western Europe. He teaches philosophy, French literature, and Islamic studies at the University of Geneva. At the same time, he works for Muslim groups like “Young Muslims of France,” and has assured himself of a role as an expert among the commissions that revolve around the European parliament. His media presence does not cease growing. He is author of more than a dozen works, including “Les musulmans dans la laïcité,” “Aux sources du renouveau musulman,” and “Les musulmans d’occident et l’avenir de l’islam.” He is a frequent guest on television and radio, and he circulates pamphlets in French or Arabic among young Muslims.

He proposes a “reformist” and “all-encompassing” Islam. His aim would seem to be that of bringing forth a body of values beginning from Islamic sources, an embodiment of the universal vocation that would take the place of the values of Western civilization. What matters to him is affirming Muslim identity and presenting it as the source of true universality.

Beginning from the statement that the fulcrum of historical movement is now constituted by the Europe-North America combination, with the Muslim countries relegated to the periphery, Ramadan notes how there are nonetheless many Muslims, especially intellectuals, who have succeeded in becoming part of the nucleus. He thus invites them to refashion it and, little by little, islamicize it: “References to Judaism and Christianity are being diluted, if not disappearing altogether” (“Les musulmans d’occident e l’avenir de l’islam,” Actes Sud-Sinbad, 2003). “Only Islam can achieve the synthesis between Christianity and humanism, and fill the spiritual void that afflicts the West” (“Islam, le face à face des civilisations,” Tawhid, 2001).

And again: “The Koran confirms, completes, and corrects the messages that preceded it” (“Les messages musulmans d’occident”). Some Christian personalities whose charitable works cannot be misconstrued – Mother Teresa, Sister Emanuelle, Abbé Pierre, Fr. Helder Camara – are exceptions who show only that all good people are implicitly Muslims, because true humanism is founded in Koranic revelation. Thus, both directly and through this humanism, the “Muslim City” can be founded upon the earth. “Today the Muslims who live in the West must unite themselves to the revolution of the antiestablishment groups from the moment when the neoliberal capitalist system becomes, for Islam, a theater of war […] The revelation of the Koran is explicit: whoever engages in speculation or cultivates financial interests eneters into war against the transcendent” (“Pouvoirs,” 2003, n. 164).

Tariq Ramadan then insists – justly – on the long-neglected intellectual riches of the great Muslim thinkers like Al-Kindi, Al-Farabi, Avicenna, and Averroes, but he forgets to situate them in their relation to Greek, Jewish, and Christian thought, and presents them as the true originators of humanism.

Jacques Jomier has efficiently summed up the goal that drives Tariq Ramadan: “His problem is not the modernization of Islam, but the islamification of modernity” (“Esprit et Vie,” February 17, 2000). We must not forget that Ramadan is the nephew of Hassan Al-Banna, the founder of the Islamic movement of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, a man Ramadan considers an eminent representative of “reformist” Islam, capable of bringing about an endogenous alternative culture from within modernity (“Peut-on vivre avec l’islam?”, Favre, 1990) ...

... the connection that this article makes between Ramadan and the Muslim Brotherhood is significant. In Onward Muslim Soldiers I explain how careful he has been to present himself as a moderate Muslim, although there are numerous questions about his real connection to radicals. The Muslim Brotherhood, of course, is the father of virtually all modern-day Islamic terror groups.

3 comments:

Last year a conference was held in Vienna about the so called Euro-IslamPosted by siad on January 29, 2008

A translated feature from the danish newspaper Kristeligt Dagblad of the 11th January, 2008

It is surprising that the conference about Euro-Islam in Vienna last year has not attracted more attention than it did, as the conference was in fact a Moslem declaration of war on the original European population.LAST YEAR a conference was held in Vienna about the so called Euro-Islam. Here the prominent Moslem delegates formulated a common future vision about Europe under the power of Islam. On that occasion, Mustafa Ceric, the Bosnian grand mufti, described “a future Islamic epoch which, with Moorish Spain and Osmanli South Europe as models, should replace Christianity”.

Among the participants was also the omnipresent professor Tariq Ramadan. He pronounced that the plans about the islamization of Europe ought to be kept a secret to the public.

They also agreed that the first step to be taken was to ensure the rights of Sharia in Europe thus stating “that at least as a start Sharia should be introduced as a parallel legal order into the European countries”. As to the details of Sharia they should be kept away from public discussions as much as possible.

It is surprising that these declarations made at the conference have not called forth much attention with the public. Either such future goals about Islam seem too imaginative to be taken seriously. Or the reality fit so badly with the picture of Islam that prevails in the “superior knowing” European cultural elite in particular, that they choose to repress what is in fact being said.

That goes for the problematic professor Tariq Ramadan, too, whose declarations were the most troublesome. He declared that his real intentions about Euro-Islam must be kept a secret to the public. What a strange hard-boiled declaration at a meeting which he must know will be reported by the press. Does he just calculate quite cynically on the general repression mechanism of the “unbelievers”?

Although a lot of heavy criticism about Tariq Ramadan and his version of Euro-Islam have been made public it has only had little effect on his reputation as a modern, moderate, European Moslem who seriously works for a peaceful integration of Moslems in the Western world. Tariq Ramadan is still a dear guest who is often invited to officialconferences all over Europe, especially in Scandinavia where, among other things, he is being consulted as an expert in measures to be taken as to problems of the radicalization of Moslem youth, and he is very much respected among young, well educated, Danish Moslems.

It should be mentioned in particular that Tariq Ramadan has influence on the organization “Critical Moslems” whose leader is Sherin Khankan, and “Moslems in Dialogue” with prominent members such as Mona Sheikh*), Asmaa Abdol-Hamid*) and Abdul Wahid Pedersen *)

Actually, it is not permitted Moslems to live in a country of the unbelievers. Only if they declare their belief in Allah and Mohammed in public it can be allowed. That means in order to act as missionaries.This is done first and foremost by making Islamic confessions at the same time rendering themselves visible in the public room. Tariq Ramadan also suggests that instead of the name “The House of War”, which is traditionally the name of the areas reigned by the “unbelievers”, it must now be called “The House of Confession”. Hethinks that this name indicates that there is a mission going on, and not a real war. Tariq Ramadan’s method shows a certain difference from that of militant Islamism, but the goal is quite the same. Both parties want Europe under the power of Islam. Tariq Ramadan is against the use of violence in Europe because it may spoil the chances to obtain Euro- Islam in the end. However, Tariq Ramadan?s utterances as to islamization by violence are very ambiguous indeed.

Qaradawi is one of the most influential Sunni Moslem savants in the Middle East who has been attached for many years to the fanatical organization The Moslem Brotherhood. This was founded by Tariq Ramadan’s grandfather, Hassan al-Banna, in 1928 in Egypt. Add to this, that he is a prominent member of the European Council of Fatwa and Science which is trying to play a powerful role as head council for EuropeanMoslems. Qaradawi has said that the goal of Islam is to conquer Europe as well as the USA by way of missions, propaganda, and get influence by way of pressure groups.

It is said that Qaradawi has made crucial finger prints on a paper called “The Project”, dated 1982, which outlines a long, detailed schedule (over a period of 100 years) for the infiltration and final conquer of Europe and the USA. This schedule concurs precisely with the declarations made at the conference in Vienna last spring.

THE PAPER was found when a luxury home in Switzerland was searched in November 2001. Its owner was Youssef Nada, a friend of the Ramadan family for many years, international manager of the Moslem Brotherhood, and managing director of the Al-Taqwa-bank in Lugano which, as it seems, has been financing Islamic terrorism such as al-Qaeda and Hamas.

According to Tariq Ramadan he missionary task will give back Moslems in Europe their self-esteem, dignity, and sense of life which so many Moslems do not have. Moslems must come out of their position of self- defence and jump into the public stage as active citizens letting their Moslem voices sound in the national parliaments claiming justice. When Tariq Ramadan uses the word ?justice? it must be noticed that he means Islamic justice, i.e. Sharia. This is the law of Allah which is ruling legal matters, as well as religious and social matters. Also “The Project” encourages Moslems to participate as active citizens as one of their crucial strategies of infiltration.

Tariq Ramadan’s encouragement to active citizenship, confession (as missionaries), and political combat for more “Moslem justice” has been very important to many young Danish Moslems who promenade the streets with eagerness these years showing their religious affiliation to the public.

When Asmaa Absol-Hamids insisted on wearing scarf in the Folketinget (Danish Parliament) it was just an Islamic political guinea pig to see how far Islam can go with the Sharia. The scarf is the very radical symbol of the acceptance of the Sharia as a whole, and it is spreading wherever the ideology of the Brotherhood gets devotees. Control of women is completely fundamental to political Islam. In this connectionit is interesting to notice with “The Project” that one of the paragraphs of their schedule is to abuse the political left wing in Europe (temporarily) as a first step and as an allied on the way to the islamization of the Western world. Concealment and denial of their true goal are also items clearly mentioned in “The Project”.

THE ORIGINAL IDEA about Euro-Islam, which was first introduced by Bassam Tibi, former professor in Göttingen, was that Islam in Europe should comply with the democratic and cultural European traditions by which they could further a political clash and thus enforce the introduction of Sharia as law of the land. Tariq Ramadan and the islamo- fascistic Brotherhood took up the idea but turned the whole thing up and down with the result that today the adherents of Euro-Islam clearly show their visions about an Islamic religious and political control of Europe.

Imaginative? Certainly, but an imaginative will to power has surprised Europe in her bed before. The new thing is that the vision of a future Islamic conquer is based on migration which in number and size has never been seen before in world history. Actually, the meeting in Vienna last spring was a Moslem declaration of war against the original European populations. When will the responsible, intellectual, and political elite in Europe be able to see the writing on the wall? Maybe the ruin of Europe can still be prevented.

*) Mona Sheikh, member of Hitzb-ut-Tahrir, often interviewed by the press

Asmaa Abdol-Hamid, member of Enhedslisten (political left wing party),tried to get into Danish Parliament and created some alarm with thepublic.

Abdul Wahid Pedersen, a Dane who has converted into Islam and hasbecome an important agitator of Islam.

This entry was posted on January 29, 2008 at 23:21 and is filed under News from abroad. .

Ibn Warraq, author of the landmark Why I Am Not a Muslim (1995), since 1998 has edited several books of Koranic criticism and on the origins of Islam, including Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out, Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism, and Which Koran? (forthcoming).

Read every word of Warraq’s review of Caroline Fourest’s remarkable investigative analysis of our era’s foremost cultural jihadist—a point perhaps overlooked given the apt characterization of the pseudo-intellectual Ramadan by author-essayist Theodore Dalrymple as the “second-hand car salesman of Islamic fundamentalism.”

Fourest has rendered an invaluable service. She demonstrates with great skill that Ramadan is a dangerous radical who, far from modernizing Islam, is in fact attempting to Islamize modernity. Of undoubted ability and charisma, but with no respect for or allegiance to Western values of liberty, Ramadan is poisoning the minds of young Muslims in the West. He spreads his message through personal appearances and with the sale of tens of thousands of cassettes through Tawhid, an Islamist publishing house with close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Under Ramadan’s influence, Islamist youths develop a hatred for Western values and dream of creating a totalitarian Islamic theocracy, not only in the heart of Europe, but eventually the entire globe, until, in the words of al-Banna, “the Islamic banner . . . waves supreme over the human race.”

UPDATE: Melanie Phillips call him in her latest column, Master of Islamist Doublespeak.

March 3rd, 2008* This morning you could see it, now you don’t. Andrew Bolt, one of the last of a handful of ‘right wing’ bloggers Downunder pulls back on the excreable Tariq Ramadan, who arrived in Australia to do an Islamo-propaganda tour, invited by labor/union prop Laurie Ferguson.

An article about Ramadan on the Bolt blog mysteriously disappeared.Any idea what happened? Why don’t you ask him, here:

“Bolt, Andrew” BoltA@heraldsun.com.au

UDATE from the Sheik: See, now its back up. Hahaha!

UPDATE: Muslim Weekly Apologizes (go here)

PHILADELPHIA – The Muslim Weekly, a London-based publication, issued an apology today to Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum, concerning a defamatory article it published in February 2007.

That article repeated a false allegation made by Tariq Ramadan that Daniel Pipes had lied to a conference hosted by London mayor Ken Livingstone in January 2007. (For details of what did occur, see the article by Mr. Pipes, "Is Tariq Ramadan Lying [about Magdi Allam]?")

Posted by Pamela Geller on Sunday, March 02, 2008 at 09:51 PM in Books I like, Taqiya:Deception to advance Islam